Comments Policy

--Visitors of all perspectives and backgrounds: you are most welcome to comment, please do.

--Disagree with our stance on anything? Please (1) familiarize yourself with it before mistaking us for anyone else and (2) address us with the same respect you yourself deserve. Free speech is both a right and a responsibility.

--See something in the blog or directory that needs improvement? Please do not simply criticize, but offer a practical solution to the problem.

--Trying to post a comment designed to promote a for-profit company we've never heard of before? We don't like censorship, but we will censor this.

Bazelon sounds more open-minded and fair than some journalists who have taken on the question, and more power to her for that. But she rests her case on the same problematic conclusions that for decades have staved off the possibility of prochoice feminists engaging with, understanding, and cooperating on common-ground issues with genuine women's rights advocates who oppose abortion.

--She criticizes the group for "its context-free quotes from suffragists. (Anthony and her contemporaries didn't oppose abortion for the reasons that the pro-life movement does today. They considered the procedure a symptom of women's powerlessness, and feared it would blur the line between a 'fallen woman' and a 'lady.')"

--Bazelon finishes with a statement from Frances Kissling, longtime head of Catholics for a Free Choice, regarding FFL's policy/nonpolicy on pregnancy prevention methods: "Feminists for Life want to present themselves as progressive women, whose only interest is protecting women. But when you hear them talk about contraception, it gets weaselly."

I will do my best in some forthcoming posts to address these criticisms. I have been involved in prolife feminist work for over twenty years--including work as a member of Feminists for Life, but on certain points and increasingly a discontent and dissenting member.